You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Sun, May 22, 2011 : 6 a.m.

With surplus in school aid fund, Legislature needs to reject severe cuts in K-12 education

By Tony Dearing

What’s wrong with this picture? The Michigan school aid fund has a surplus of more than $600 million and the state just found an additional $430 million in revenue that it wasn’t expecting. Yet massive cuts have been looming for public education.

We understand that Gov. Rick Snyder inherited a $1.4 billion budget deficit and has had to make hard, unpopular choices in order to get the state’s financial house in order. But the amount that he originally proposed to slash funding for K-12 schools is too severe, and would cripple local districts at a time when education is more important than ever to the future well-being of the state.

We call on the Legislature to restore most of the funding that public schools would lose. At the same time, we call on local districts to do their part in balancing their budgets by tackling the kind of necessary cost-cutting that’s overdue.

It’s been clear in recent weeks, as the Republican-controlled Legislature pushed through other parts of Snyder’s budget plan, that even his loyalists have found his cuts to K-12 education too drastic to accept.

And rightly so. While the governor is betting on a huge tax cut for businesses to create new jobs — a proposition there’s no hard evidence to support — we think the state needs a more balanced approach that recognizes that quality of education and quality of life are at least as much a factor in economic growth as the business tax rate.

Here in Washtenaw County, we are fortunate to have some of the best public schools in Michigan, and financially eviscerating them is exactly the wrong direction for the state to be headed in right now. Protecting funding for schools should be the Legislature’s first priority as it finishes work on the 2012 budget.

The first step would be a commitment not to raid the school aid fund. In his proposed budget, Gov. Snyder essentially treats the state’s general fund and the school aid fund as a single pot of money. He called for dipping into the school aid fund to the tune of $900 million to reduce funding cuts to other areas, including community colleges and four-year universities.

We object to this siphoning of the school aid fund, which is a repeat of what lawmakers did to public schools years ago when they used lottery money as an excuse to shift other funds away from K-12 education - except this time it’s being contemplated on a much grander scale. This shouldn’t happen. Local schools have been put in a position where they rely on the state for most of their funding, and the state should live up to its commitment to them by keeping the school aid fund intact.

Beyond that, we are convinced that even with all the harsh choices facing lawmakers, there is sufficient funding to avoid anything nearly as deep as the $470 per pupil cut in funding that Snyder originally proposed for public schools.

Especially since last week’s biannual revenue estimating conference in Lansing found that the state will end this fiscal year with more than $400 million in additional revenue, it should be possible to reduce the funding cut to K-12 to somewhere between $100 and $200 per pupil. Last week, the governor and Republican lawmakers reached an agreement that would result in an effective cut of $270 per pupil for public schools, which is less severe, but still too deep of a reduction.

That being said, local schools still should be prepared to accept some loss of funding, and deal with it by reducing their operational costs in ways they haven’t so far.

For one thing, the unexpected surplus that the state is realizing this year is a one-time gain, driven largely by a rebound in the domestic auto industry. Given high gas prices and potential interruptions in the auto supply chain due to the earthquake in Japan, we can’t count on that continuing. Gov. Snyder is right to suggest that some of this unexpected tax revenue should go into the state’s rainy day fund or pay down debt.

Beyond that, all areas of the state budget are suffering, and local schools have to share the budget pain - just not to the degree the governor proposed. In exchange for less drastic cuts, school districts can balance their budgets if they do more to rein in costs. Two areas, in particular, must be addressed.

One is employee health care costs. The state Senate is taking on that issue on behalf of local districts, approving a bill that says public employers — whether at the local level or the state level — could not pay more than 80 percent of the health insurance premiums of their employees. This would bring public employees more in line with the private sector, and save public employers in Michigan an estimated $500 million annually. Though we’d prefer to see this accomplished at the bargaining table, one way or another, it has to happen.

The other area of big potential savings for local schools would be in the consolidation of non-instructional services. This is a proven money-saver that districts have moved far too slowly on. In Washtenaw County, school districts have consolidated a number of services, but there’s potential for much more. For instance, when the Washtenaw Intermediate School District offered to run a consolidated bus system, only three of the county’s public school districts agreed to participate.

The time has come for schools to take a hard look at all back-office services and consolidate as much of that as possible. If they don’t, then the state should prod them more aggressively. Gov. Snyder says he’ll put more emphasis on school consolidation issues in his 2013 budget, but we think the time for that is now. And the state should not only be providing financial incentives for districts to consolidate non-instructional activities, it should offer clear, specific guidance on how that can be achieved.

The studies we’ve seen suggest that of all the factors that lead to economic health these days, a well-educated populace is the most important indicator. This is not the time to be disinvesting in education. The public isn’t willing to accept deep cuts to public schools, and the Legislature should be either.

(This editorial was published in today's newspaper and reflects the opinion of the Editorial Board at AnnArbor.com.)

Comments

Monica R-W

Mon, May 23, 2011 : 6:50 a.m.

Tony, great balanced point of view on Gov. Snyder proposed gut of Public Education system in Michigan and why NOW with a School Aid Fund Surplus, it is frankly UNNECESSARY. We actually agree on most of subjects outlined in this article. Only point of disagreement is the 80/20 split. It is still unnecessary and results in a pay cut for Michigan's great resource, our teachers. Governor Snyder's and the GOP House/Senate medical deductible split does not make any allowances for co-payments, which can run as high as $200 for an emergency room visit. Let's not count prescription drug co-payments, which for non-genetics are frankly outrageous. Still, it is nice to read that an Ann Arbor.com writer can disagree with Governor Snyder policy, that if passed, will lead our free public schools right into the hands of "For-Profit" Corporations!

Tony Dearing

Mon, May 23, 2011 : 1:24 p.m.

Monica, I understand your point about the 80/20 split. Ideally, these savings would be achieved through negotiations, which allow each district take into account factors like co-pays. We acknowledge that the Senate legislation is more of a blunt instrument. Our concern is that while school districts have been moving gradually in this direction, they need to move faster, and the Legislature may just move in and force the issue.

Richard Lake

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 3:52 p.m.

Legal recall petitions are being circulated to recall Gov. Rick Snyder. The Official website for the recall effort is <a href="http://firericksnyder.org/" rel='nofollow'>http://firericksnyder.org/</a> Beware of Republican dirty tricks - false petitions, including any on line, etc. With your help we can send Gov. Rick Snyder home! It Is Not What Others Do, It Is What You Do. &quot;A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.&quot; - Margaret Mead

RayA2

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 3:02 p.m.

I am so sick of teapublicans telling us the Orwellian chant that we can get better educated students if we just take more money out of the school budget. I lived just across the Michigan border for some time and I know that Michigan's higher teacher salary took some of the best teachers away from my school diatrict. From my time in Michigan I know that there are many excellent teachers who would not be teaching if forced to live on the wages of my previous home state. Private sector ownership would most likely be the beneficiary of their talents rather than the public. Paying teachers what they are worth used to be a well respected goal. Has Rupert Murdoch's continuous set of self serving lies and deception been that successful that even our most common of values has been destroyed?

gild

Thu, May 26, 2011 : 2:11 a.m.

RayA2, if you don't mind the question, what district were you in and whe was this?

DonBee

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 12:47 p.m.

The elephant in the room is the number of school districts in Michigan. No one wants to lose &quot;local control&quot; but with mandatory curriculum and other State and Federal mandates, there is little room for local control any more. The other thing no one wants is to lose the coveted bragging rights for their local school in sports. Maybe it is time for all administration to be consolidated at the Intermediate School District level. In several states teachers are under a state-wide contract. Again no one wants to talk about it, but maybe it is time to think in that direction. No change is easy, but growing the bureaucracy in hundreds of school districts makes little or no sense. When we were restricted to horses, having very small school districts made sense. Today it does not. Now consolidating school districts does NOT mean massive schools, that is counter productive, smaller schools makes the most sense, but with the administrative costs and the way schools are run today, larger buildings make sense. Plymouth-Canton solved many problems by putting 3 high schools on the same plot of land. Most students only visit their own building, but some in AP classes or in Vocational classes, cross the campus to attend classes in other buildings, efficiently allowing a much wider variety of classes than any one of the schools could provide. They also have fewer athletic fields to maintain. We all could learn from best practices, but we will in the end argue that any change to education is wrong for the children, when what we mean is &quot;Don't Impact ME!&quot;

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Mon, May 23, 2011 : 4:44 p.m.

DonBee wrote: &quot;The pension issue is harder, there are contracts and unions in the way of changing the pensions.&quot; Wrong. K-12 pensions have nothing to do contracts, and DonBee knows this. We've *had* this conversation before. Pensions for ALL employees in the K-12 system is set by state law and are not subject to negotiation. Want to change the pension system? Change the law. But no one is willing to do that because of the costs involved--yes--it will cost a GREAT deal of money to change the K-12 pension system. Good Night and Good Luck

cette

Mon, May 23, 2011 : 10:45 a.m.

Pension reform has to happen. Has to. The overall share of the budget being paid out to fund the pension goes up every year. This year it's 24%, it goes up every year. Yes, it's a terrible tangle to figure out, but it has to be done. A bigger district doesn't by any stretch equal a better district. DPS comes to mind, but not only of course. You can not only blame school boards. We live in a period of great financial flux. It's the old Chinese curse, may you live in interesting times. Online courses mean internet access available during school time to all kids, and that costs money. It's somebody's computer, somebody's electric bill, somebody has to pay the firewall costs, maintenance bill. A home tax, if you will if it takes place in your home. Somebody has to monitor that the child is doing their work, following up on it, and that sounds like a stay at home parent, not school staff. Your just shifting the responsibility of educating the child to the parents, while avoiding pensions reform. I say no way. Kids go to school to socialize, to learn compliance, to learn how to work collaboratively, and to explore different things, that will hopefully lead to interesting and productive work and home lifes. Seriously, you don't learn that in front of a computer screen.

DonBee

Mon, May 23, 2011 : 5:24 a.m.

cette - Busing will be cut, and the environment will suffer with more miles in more vehicles, but that is not the school district's problem. Nimble is as nimble does in a building. Most districts wait for the state to tell them which way to jump when it comes to most things. Administration and consolidation is not a red herring, it is a problem. One that can be fixed. The pension issue is harder, there are contracts and unions in the way of changing the pensions. Done right, everyone would come to the table and create a sustainable answer, it will not happen. On the other hand, consolidation of districts can be done by a change to the law. The current situation with school boards cause the logjams. It is time to consolidate administration and take overhead out, so we keep more teachers in the classrooms. skfina2 - We have all heard that the board will do this or that, given the supposed cuts... we now know that the cuts will not be as deep as originally thought. All I can do is hope the class sizes do not rise to the level you indicate. The strategy that the Superintendents in Michigan use is to make public pronouncement of deep cuts to teachers so that parents end up riled up, then when the dust settles and they get their money, a much lower number disappears. The cuts should come from anywhere but the classroom first. As to small classes, I would suggest that some of them might be best done on-line. Michigan Virtual High School has a great set of tools available.

cette

Mon, May 23, 2011 : 1:06 a.m.

No, I disagree, the elephant in the room is the school pension costs, not the number of school districts in Michigan. Consolidating districts to one campus means that when the bus service is cut, it's going to impact families harder, and Don Bee, you believe that bus service can't be cut. Sure it can, and it's happenning. Consolidation is a red herring argument, and will lead to logjam, not nimbleness...

skfina2

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 2:16 p.m.

Sometimes &quot;Don't impact me&quot; IS in the children's best interest. In Plymouth-Canton we are looking at raising the staffing ratio at the middle school level to 35:1, while cutting small elective classes like my Math Strategies remediation class. If I have 175 kids passing through my classroom each day, it will be extremely hard for me to know each child's learning style and differentiate my lessons. If a child is one of 35 (or more, since some classes will end up being larger due to scheduling quirks), that child might not get all the individual attention he or she needs. It's a lose-lose situation brought about by unnecessary budget cuts.

local

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 12:35 p.m.

The big issue with the 20% is that it isn't every public employee being asked to do it. If I am correct, which I might be a little off, legislative and municipial workers are exempt from the 20%. So basically you are asking teachers and police/firefighters to pay it. In Ann Arbor, teachers agreed to step freezes and zero raises over the past few years. Many teachers already pay part of their insurance based on the insurance they choose. Cuts are needed clearly, but attracting good people to the profession is important as well. What if a teacher had an opportunity to work overtime to make more money, like in the private sector, maybe more support would come. I just think it stinks a little to say public employees must pay the 20%, but not ALL public employees.

tim

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 12:07 p.m.

When Republicans had a chance to control health care cost by voting for a public option on Obama's plan they rejected it. Instead of doing anything to control these escalating costs they're just forcing those costs onto the middle class--- So what's is the difference between the Obama mandate to buy health insurance and the Republican position to pay for insurance you all ready have?

cm

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 11:09 a.m.

Many highly successful school districts have been taking cuts for years. For example, since 2003, Plymouth-Canton Community Schools has reduced their budget 11.4%, in a time when costs, such as fuel, keep increasing. Any cuts right now just add on to the cuts from previous years. PCCS is the third largest district in the state, yet they sped less on administration than 86% of the other districts. As far as health care costs go, employees have been taking concessions. West Bloomfield took a 10% pay cut. Dearborn took a 7% pay cut. Ann Arbor took unpaid days this year. These are not easy sacrifices, especially in single income households and for those whose home values have plummeted. Many unions have allowed salary freezes and decreases to protect this benefit. Making these cuts nullifies the sacrifices that were made in bargaining to protect health care. Also, the health care cuts effect many positions where the health benefits are the big benefit. Paraprofessionals, who are integral in mainstreaming a variety of students, often make $10-$12 and hour, so paying 20% of their health care will make many of these valued employees look for jobs elsewhere.

1bit

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 6:53 p.m.

Absolutely.

maestra27

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 1:06 p.m.

@ 1bit When teachers enter the field of education, they do so knowing their salaries will not be commensurate to that of their private sector counterparts. Good benefits, including health care, help equalize their lower salaries. So my question to you is this: If teachers are required to pay 20% of their health care (the same as their private sector counterparts) then shouldn't they also be entitled to make a salary equal to those in the private sector?

1bit

Sun, May 22, 2011 : 11:33 a.m.

Cuts are hard. Nobody likes or wants them. The private sector has been dealing with cuts for years as well. Is it really that unconscionable for those in the private sector, who pay 20% of their health care, to ask those in the public sector to do the same?